MODERATOR'S NOTE: On October 14, following the vote, I announced
cloture on the discussion of the moderatorship of the AmSci Forum.
Sally Morris violated this cloture with her posting on liblicense
moderatorship, and I violated its enforcement by allowing Sally's
posting. Now I will make amends: Those who are dissatisfied with my
10-year moderatorship of this Forum are respectfully invited to leave
the Forum and start one of their own. No more postings on the
moderatorship will be approved.
Dixit.
Stevan Harnad
Moderator, American Scientist Open Access Forum
On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 3:04 PM, Jones, Doug
<jonesd_at_u.library.arizona.edu> wrote:
While I understand the sentiment to focus on the content
rather than the
process, it seems to me that what the recent interactions
about Stevan's
moderation suggest is a need to have some commonly
understood guidelines
about how the list will be managed.
Sally's constructive suggestions are the most appropriate
means (IMHO)
to put this to issue to rest, rather than treating it as
an annoying
aberration that should dismissed and forgotten.
The vote confirmed that the majority of those responding
supported
Steven remaining as moderator. It did not resolve the
issue of how the
list was to be moderated and what the role of the
moderator should be.
Doug Jones
Science-Engineering Library
University of Arizona
Tucson, AZ
-----Original Message-----
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
[mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG]
On
Behalf Of Jeffery, KG (Keith)
Sent: Thursday, October 23, 2008 9:32 AM
To:
AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: Liblicense-l: rules of the road
All -
As others have said let us get back to the purpose of
this thread and
stop fretting about how it is moderated; the vote has
taken place, let
us all get on with sharing experiences, views and
proposals concerning
the real challenges we face.
Keith
>----------------------------------------------------------
>Prof Keith G Jeffery E: keith.jeffery_at_stfc.ac.uk
>Director Information Technology & International Strategy
>Science and Technology Facilities Council
>Rutherford Appleton Laboratory
>Harwell Science and Innovation Campus
>Didcot, OXON OX11 0QX UK
>T: +44 1235 44 6103 F:+44 1235 44 5147
>President ERCIM & STFC Director: http://www.ercim.org/
>W3C Office at STFC-RAL http://www.w3.org/
>President euroCRIS
http://www.eurocris.org/
>VLDB Trustee Emeritus:
http://www.vldb.org/
>EDBT Board Member
http://www.edbt.org/
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------
>The contents of this email are sent in confidence for
the use of the
intended recipient only. If you are not one of the
intended recipients
do not take action on it or show it to anyone else, but
return this
email to the sender and delete your copy of it
>The CCLRC telecommunications systems may be monitored in
accordance
with the policy available from
<
http://dlitd.dl.ac.uk/policy/monitoring/monitoring%20statement.htm>.
>-----------------------------------------------------------------------
-------------------------------
Please note that from 20081006 all my email will be sent
out from stfc
in the format above. However, incoming email using other
email
addresses for me will work for the forseeable future.
Nonetheless, you
are advised to change any address book entries or typed
'to' email
addresses to the new address provided above.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----------------------
-----Original Message-----
From: American Scientist Open Access Forum
[mailto:AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG]
On
Behalf Of Leslie Carr
Sent: 23 October 2008 17:08
To:
AMERICAN-SCIENTIST-OPEN-ACCESS-FORUM_at_LISTSERVER.SIGMAXI.ORG
Subject: Re: Liblicense-l: rules of the road
On 23 Oct 2008, at 12:09, Sally Morris (Morris
Associates) wrote:
> Here's a set of 'rules' for another email discussion
forum, one which
> I personally think is moderated in an exemplary fashion
I expect there are hundreds of other discussion forums
whose charters
and processes are indeed praiseworthy. To forestall a
combinatorial
explosion of admirable attributes, let me draw the
attention of those
who are interested to the following analysis of the
diverse practices of
mailing list moderation:
Berge, Z.L. & Collins, M.P. (2000). Perceptions of
e-moderators about
their roles and functions in moderating electronic
mailing lists.
Distance Education: An International Journal, 21(1),
81-100.
http://www.emoderators.com/moderators/modsur97.html
Given the range of practices represented above and the
result of the
recent vote, I propose that the status quo is admirable
position to
maintain. (Moderation-wise, not OA-wise!)
--
Les Carr
--
Scanned by iCritical.
Received on Fri Oct 24 2008 - 03:39:38 BST